Enforcing the Shari`ah in Nigeria

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-40
Author(s):  
Ogechi Anyanwu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Muslim Women ◽  
Social Solidarity ◽  
Northern Nigeria ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
The Law ◽  
Uncertain Future

The reemergence of the Shari`ah in northern Nigeria in 2000 is reshaping the Muslims’ criminal justice system in unintended ways. This article accounts for and provides fresh insights on how the fate of Muslim women under the Shari`ah intertwines with the uncertain future of the law in Nigeria. Using Emile Durkheim’s theory of conscience collective as an explanatory framework of analysis, I argue that the well-placed objective of using the Shari` ah to reaffirm or create social solidarity among Muslim Nigerians has been undermined by the unequal, harsher punishments and suppression of human rights perpetrated against Muslim women since 2000. A I show, not only does such discrimination violate the principle of natural justice upheld by Islam, but it also threatens to shrink, if not wipe out, the collective conscience of Nigerian Muslims that the law originally sought to advance.

Enforcing the Shari`ah in Nigeria

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-40
Author(s):  
Ogechi Anyanwu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Muslim Women ◽  
Social Solidarity ◽  
Northern Nigeria ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
The Law ◽  
Uncertain Future

The reemergence of the Shari`ah in northern Nigeria in 2000 is reshaping the Muslims’ criminal justice system in unintended ways. This article accounts for and provides fresh insights on how the fate of Muslim women under the Shari`ah intertwines with the uncertain future of the law in Nigeria. Using Emile Durkheim’s theory of conscience collective as an explanatory framework of analysis, I argue that the well-placed objective of using the Shari` ah to reaffirm or create social solidarity among Muslim Nigerians has been undermined by the unequal, harsher punishments and suppression of human rights perpetrated against Muslim women since 2000. A I show, not only does such discrimination violate the principle of natural justice upheld by Islam, but it also threatens to shrink, if not wipe out, the collective conscience of Nigerian Muslims that the law originally sought to advance.

scholarly journals Islamic criminal procedure law: human rights issues

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 47-57
Author(s):  
Yusif Mamedov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

It has been established that harsh Islamic punishments are practically not applied due to the high burden of proof and the need to involve an exhaustive number of witnesses. It has been proven that the Islamic criminal justice system provides the accused with basic guarantees. It is noted that according to Sharia, Islamic crimes are divided into three categories: Hadd, Qisas and Tazir. It is noted that Islamic criminal law provides that the accused is not guilty if his guilt is not proven. It is noted that equality before the law is one of the main legal principles of the Islamic criminal model, as all persons are equal before the law and are condemned equally regardless of religious or economic status (lack of immunity). There are four main principles aimed at protecting human rights in Islamic criminal law: the principle of legality (irreversible action), the principle of presumption of innocence, the principle of equality and the principle of ultimate proof. In addition, the Islamic criminal justice system provides defendants with many safeguards, which are always followed during detention, investigation, trial and after trial. It is established that such rights are: 1) the right of every person to the protection of life, honor, freedom and property; 2) the right to due process of law; 3) the right to a fair and open trial before an impartial judge; 4) freedom from coercion to self-disclosure; 5) protection against arbitrary arrest and detention; 6) immediate court proceedings; 7) the right to appeal. It is noted that if a person is charged, he/she has many remedies It is noted that the trial must be fair, in which the qadi (judge) plays an important role. It has been established that, in addition to the procedural guarantees, the qualifications and character of the qadi, as well as the strict requirements of Islamic rules of proof, are intended to ensure a fair trial in the case of the accused. Adherence to these principles has been shown to indicate that the rights of the accused are fully guaranteed under Islamic criminal law.

scholarly journals The scope of changes in the criminal law system in India

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (S4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shalinee Vishwakarma
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Law System ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Police System

The criminal justice system is an idea founded on judicial principles and constitutionalism. It includes the interaction of many institutions and remedies. An effective criminal justice system is essential for an orderly society and the protection of human rights. However, quite different from this ideology, Indian criminal justice faces many complications such as soaring crime rates, outdated laws, late proceedings, inefficient law enforcement agencies. to name a few. The criminal justice system urgently needs reform measures, based on natural justice and human rights, to rejuvenate the system. These minimal but essential measures include consistent reform of the criminal law, fostering and building trust in a skeptical justice system, curbing abuses of power by the police system, and obvious measures. of the welfare state and it is the moral duty of every citizen of India to obey and respect criminals. judicial system.  

scholarly journals Penegakan Hukum Pidana Terhadap Anak Yang Terjerat Perkara Pidana Melalui Diversi (Studi Di Polrestabes Medan)

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
Akalafikta Jaya ◽  
Triono Eddy ◽  
Alpi Sahari
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Convictions ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Law

In the past, the punishment of children was the same as the punishment of adults. This causes the psychological condition of children ranging from investigation, investigation and trial to be disturbed because it is often intimidated by law enforcement agencies. Under these conditions, Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System was born. One of the reforms in the Child Criminal Justice System Law requires the settlement of a child criminal case by diversion. Based on the results of research that the conception of criminal offenses against children in conflict with the law in Indonesia is different from criminal convictions to adults. Children are given the lightest possible punishment and half of the criminal convictions of adult criminal offenses. That criminal liability for children who are ensnared in a criminal case according to the Law on the Criminal Justice System for Children is still carried out but with different legal sanctions from adults. Criminal imprisonment against children is an ultimumremedium effort, meaning that criminal imprisonment against children is the last legal remedy after there are no other legal remedies that benefit the child. That the concept of enforcement of criminal law against children caught in criminal cases through diversion is in fact not all have applied it. Some criminal cases involving children as the culprit, in court proceedings there are still judges who impose prison sentences on children who are dealing with the law.

scholarly journals Legality Letter of Statement of Khilaf in Indonesia Criminal Justice System

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 128
Author(s):  
Rugun Romaida Hutabarat
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Matters

In criminal law, a person charged with a criminal offense may be punished if it meets two matters, namely his act is unlawful, and the perpetrator of a crime may be liable for the indicated action (the offender's error) or the act may be dismissed to the perpetrator, and there is no excuse. The reasons may result in the death or the removal of the implied penalty. But it becomes a matter of how if the Letter of Statement Khilaf is the answer to solve the legal problems. The person who refuses or does not do what has been stated in the letters is often called "wanprestasi" because the statement is categorized as an agreement. The statement includes an agreement which is the domain of civil law or criminal law, so its application in the judicial system can be determined. This should be reviewed in the application of the law, are there any rules governing wrong statements in the criminal justice system. By using a declaration of khilaf as a way out of criminal matters, then the statement should be known in juridical rules. This study uses normative juridical methods, by conceptualizing the law as a norm rule which is a benchmark of human behavior, with emphasis on secondary data sources collected from the primary source of the legislation. The result of this research is that the statement of khilaf has legality, it is based on Jurisprudence No. 3901 K / Pdt / 1985 jo Article 189 Paragraph (1) of Indonesian criminal procedure law. However, this oversight letter needs to be verified in front of the court to be valid evidence, but this letter of error is not a deletion of a criminal offense, because the culpability of the defendant has justified the crime he committed. Such recognition, cannot make it free from the crime that has been committed.Keywords: Legality, Letter of Statement, Criminal Justice System

The Legal Enforcement of Integrity

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-62
Author(s):  
Stuart P. Green
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Sexual Assault ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Political System ◽  
Legal Discourse ◽  
Bodily Integrity ◽  
Moral Concepts ◽  
Legal Enforcement ◽  
The Law

Talk of “integrity” is ubiquitous in law and legal discourse: Protecting the integrity of our political system has been cited as a basis for anti-corruption laws; preserving the integrity of the legal profession as a principle underlying the rules of lawyer ethics; ensuring integrity in policing and in the wider criminal justice system as a justification for excluding evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution; and protecting bodily integrity as a potential goal for the law of rape and sexual assault. This chapter examines what integrity means in each of these contexts, what these uses have in common, and whether thinking about these various rules and doctrines in terms of integrity rather than other moral concepts leads to any practical difference in outcome. It also asks what the examination of integrity in the law can tell us about the concept of integrity in other contexts.

scholarly journals How Silent is the Right to Silence?

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Biber
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Religion And Psychology ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
The Law ◽  
Critical Interpretation ◽  
The Right

A long-held and fundamental principle of our criminal justice system is that people accused of crimes have a right to silence, arising from the presumption of innocence. Rules of evidence try to protect this ‘right’ during trial, by ensuring that juries understand that adverse inferences cannot be drawn from the silence of the accused. Silence, in court, can mean nothing, and we are not to speculate about what might motivate an accused person to remain silent, or what they might have said had they spoken. However, an examination of the jurisprudence in this area shows that the law is often not dealing with actual silence; sometimes when the law refers to the ‘right to silence’, it seems to mean a ‘refusal to hear’. In other instances, there is actual silence, and yet the law refuses to subject that silence to any critical interpretation, insisting that we cannot infer anything from it. While we have learned, from theatre, music, linguistics, religion and psychology, to develop sophisticated means for interpreting silence, the law demands that we set aside these interpretive tools, hearing silence that isn’t there, and inferring nothing about something.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document